| Probable cause affidavit: |
SUBMITTED BY: LABORDA, MICHAEL (AR13-6045) DID UNLAWFULLY ENTER OR REMAIN IN A CERTAIN STRUCTURE OR CURTILAGE THEREOF, TO-WIT: RESIDENCE, LOCATED AT 1 DANIEL STREET, BEVERLY HILLS, IN THE COUNTY AND STATE AFORESAID, THE PROPERTY OF THE VICTIM ONE, WITHOUT SAID PERSON'S CONSENT, WITH THE INTENT TO COMMIT AN OFFENSE THEREIN, TO-WIT: CRIMINAL MISCHIEF, IN VIOLATION OF FLORIDA STATUTE 810.02(1) AND 810.02(4); DID UNLAWFULLY COMMIT BATTERY UPON THE VICTIM BY ACTUALLY AND INTENTIONALLY TOUCHING OR STRIKING SAID PERSON AGAINST SAID PERSON'S WILL, OR BY INTENTIONALLY CAUSING BODILY HARM, TO WIT: PUNCHED VICTIM TWO MULTIPLE TIMES IN THE HEAD AND BODY IN VIOLATION OF FLORIDA STATE STATUTE 784.03(1)(A)(1). ON 061213, AT APPROXIMATELY 1937 HOURS, I WAS DISPATCHED TO 1 DANIEL STREET, BEVERLY HILLS, IN REFERENCE TO A BURGLARY IN PROGRESS. UPON ARRIVAL, IT WAS DETERMINED THERE WAS NOT A BURGLARY IN PROGRESS BUT THAT A BURGLARY HAD OCCURRED SOMETIME TODAY PRIOR TO MY ARRIVAL. I OBSERVED THE RESIDENCE AND NOTICED THAT THE FRONT STORM DOOR HAD BEEN KICKED IN RESULTING IN A LARGE DENT TO THE DOOR. UPON FURTHER OBSERVATION I DISCOVERED THE GLASS IN THE WINDOW OF THE CARPORT DOOR HAD BEEN REMOVED. IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT THIS DOOR CAN BE UNLOCKED ONCE THE GLASS HAD BEEN REMOVED FROM THE WINDOW. I ALSO OBSERVED SEVERAL OUTDOOR DECORATIONS THAT HAD BEEN SMASHED ON THE DRIVEWAY AND UP AGAINST THE WALLS OF THE RESIDENCE. THE RESIDENT/VICTIM ONE, MR RAYMOND BELLO, AND HIS EX-WIFE VICTIM TWO, MS AMANDA HARRINGTON, ARRIVED ON SCENE A SHORT TIME LATER AND WERE SHOWN MY FINDINGS. WE THEN ENTERED THE RESIDENCE AND OBSERVED FURTHER DAMAGE INSIDE. MULTIPLE ITEMS HAD BEEN THROWN THROUGHOUT THE RESIDENCE AND SEVERAL ITEMS WERE BROKEN INCLUDING A MICROWAVE, GLASSWARE, ELECTRONICS, AND FURNITURE. CLOTHING AND OTHER MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS HAD BEEN THROWN ABOUT THE BEDROOM. BOTH VICTIMS WERE SURPRISED BUT ANGRY AND IMMEDIATELY STATED THEY KNEW WHO WAS RESPONSIBLE. I THEN SPOKE WITH VICTIM ONE. HE ADVISED ME THAT HE AND VICTIM TWO HAD RECENTLY GOTTEN A DIVORCE AND HE HAD STARTED A RELATIONSHIP WITH THE DEFENDANT, MS DANYELL FERNANDEZ. VICTIM ONE STATED THE RELATIONSHIP DID NOT LAST LONG AND THEY SPLIT UP APPROXIMATELY TWO WEEKS AGO. VICTIM ONE STATED HE HAS SINCE GOTTEN BACK WITH VICTIM TWO AND THE DEFENDANT BECAME ANGRY THAT HE LEFT HER FOR VICTIM TWO. VICTIM ONE SAID THE DEFENDANT NEVER LIVED AT HIS RESIDENCE AND HAS NO PROPERTY INSIDE. VICTIM ONE STATED THAT HE AND VICTIM TWO HAD BEEN RECEIVING CALLS AND TEXTS FROM THE DEFENDANT IN WHICH SHE IS CURSING AND YELLING AND THREATENING TO BEAT UP AND KILL VICTIM TWO. VICTIM ONE SAID THAT HE BELIEVES THE DEFENDANT CAME TO HIS RESIDENCE WHILE HE WAS AWAY, BROKE IN, AND TRASHED HIS RESIDENCE OUT OF JEALOUSY AND IN RETALIATION. VICTIM ONE STATED HE HAD LAST BEEN HOME AT APPROXIMATELY 1700 HOURS AND THERE WAS NO DAMAGE AT THAT TIME. I THEN SPOKE TO VICTIM TWO AND SHE CORROBORATED VICTIM ONEâS STATEMENTS. SHE ALSO ADVISED SHE HAS RECEIVED CALLS AND TEXTS FROM THE DEFENDANT THREATENING TO BEAT HER UP AND KILL HER. VICTIM TWO ALSO ADVISED THAT SHE BELIEVES THE DEFENDANT IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE BREAK IN. BOTH PARTIES ADVISED THAT THE DEFENDANT LIVES AT 1 WILLIAM TELL LANE, BEVERLY HILLS AND IS USUALLY IN THE COMPANY OF HER FRIEND THE SUSPECT, MS JENNIE INGRAM, WHO LIVES AT 11 TAFT STREET, BEVERLY HILLS. BOTH PARTIES ADVISED THAT THEY ARE NOT SURE BUT IT IS POSSIBLE THAT THE SUSPECT BROKE INTO THE RESIDENCE WITH THE DEFENDANT. AT THAT TIME, I BEGAN TO PHOTOGRAPH AND PROCESS THE SCENE FOR EVIDENCE (SEE CRIME SCENE TECHNICIAN (CST) REPORT FOR FURTHER). WHILE PROCESSING THE SCENE, VICTIM ONE RECEIVED A TELEPHONE CALL FROM THE DEFENDANT AT TELEPHONE NUMBER 352-464-2708. I ADVISED VICTIM ONE TO PUT THE TELEPHONE ON SPEAKER AND NOT LET THE DEFENDANT KNOW I WAS LISTENING. VICTIM ONE ANSWERED THE TELEPHONE AND I IMMEDIATELY HEARD A FEMALE ON THE OTHER LINE YELLING THAT SHE WANTED TO âBEAT HER ASSâ REFERRING TO VICTIM TWO. VICTIM ONE SIGNALED TO ME THAT THE CALL WAS IN FACT THE DEFENDANT AND THEN ASKED THE DEFENDANT âDANYELL DID YOU BREAK INTO MY HOUSE AND SMASH ALL MY STUFF?â THE DEFENDANT REPLIED TO VICTIM ONE âYEP MAYBE JUST A LITTLE BIT.â VICTIM ONE ASKED THE DEFENDANT SEVERAL TIMES WHY SHE BROKE INTO HIS RESIDENCE TO WHICH SHE REPLIED âYOU FUCKING DESERVE ITâ AND THEN CONTINUED TO YELL âIâM GONNA BEAT HER ASS.â VICTIM TWO THEN BEGAN TO SPEAK TO THE DEFENDANT. THE DEFENDANT BECAME MORE AGITATED AND BEGAN TO YELL LOUDER INTO THE TELEPHONE. I OVERHEARD THE DEFENDANT TELL VICTIM TWO TO COME OVER TO HER RESIDENCE SO SHE COULD âBEAT HER ASS.â AT THAT TIME, I HAD VICTIM TWO HANG UP THE TELEPHONE. AFTER FINISHING PROCESSING THE SCENE, I RESPONDED TO 1 WILLIAM TELL LANE AS WELL AS 11 TAFT STREET, BEVERLY HILLS, IN AN ATTEMPT TO LOCATED THE DEFENDANT AND SUSPECT BUT WAS MET WITH NEGATIVE RESULTS. I ADVISED BOTH VICTIMS THAT I HAD BEEN UNABLE TO LOCATE EITHER PARTY. I PROVIDED THEM WITH A CASE CARD BEARING MY NAME, CASE NUMBER AND IDENTIFICATION NUMBER AND TOLD THEM TO CALL ME IF THEY LEARNED WHERE THEY MAY BE. A SHORT TIME LATER, I RECEIVED A CALL FROM VICTIM ONE. HE ADVISED ME THAT HE HAD JUST RECEIVED A CALL FROM THE DEFENDANT WHO TOLD HIM SHE WAS ABOUT TEN MINUTES AWAY AND WAS EN ROUTE TO HIS RESIDENCE TO BEAT UP VICTIM TWO. I RESPONDED TO THE AREA AND PARKED A COUPLE OF STREETS AWAY AWAITING THE DEFENDANTâS ARRIVAL. I PROVIDED VICTIM ONE MY TELEPHONE NUMBER AND TOLD HIM TO CALL ME IMMEDIATELY IF SHE WAS TO SHOW UP AT HIS RESIDENCE SO I COULD RESPOND. APPROXIMATELY 5 MINUTES LATER, I RECEIVED A CALL FROM VICTIM ONE WHO WAS SCREAMING INTO THE TELEPHONE âSHE IS HERE!â I IMMEDIATELY RESPONDED TO THE RESIDENCE WHERE I OBSERVED THE DEFENDANT SWINGING PUNCHES AT VICTIM TWO IN THE DRIVEWAY OF THE RESIDENCE. THE FIGHT WAS BROKEN UP AND THE DEFENDANT WAS SECURED IN HANDCUFF (DOUBLE LOCKED) BEHIND HER BACK AND SECURED IN THE REAR OF MY PATROL VEHICLE. NEITHER PARTY SUSTAINED ANY SERIOUS INJURIES, AND BOTH REFUSED EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES. I READ THE DEFENDANT MIRANDA RIGHTS VIA PRE-PRINTED CARD AND SHE ADVISED SHE UNDERSTOOD HER RIGHTS AND WISHED TO SPEAK WITH ME. I FIRST ASKED THE DEFENDANT WHAT HAD OCCURRED REFERENCE TO THE FIGHT. SHE CONFIRMED THAT SHE HAD COME TO THE RESIDENCE LOOKING FOR VICTIM TWO WITH THE INTENTION OF PHYSICALLY FIGHTING HER. UPON QUESTIONING HER ABOUT THE BURGLARY AND DAMAGED PROPERTY, SHE DENIED ANY INVOLVEMENT AND STATED SHE HAD NOT BEEN AT THE VICTIMâS RESIDENCE AT ALL THAT DAY. I ADVISED THE DEFENDANT THAT I HAD OVERHEARD THE TELEPHONE CONVERSATION IN WHICH SHE ADMITTED TO VICTIM ONE THAT SHE WAS RESPONSIBLE. I AGAIN ASKED THE DEFENDANT WHAT HAD OCCURRED AND SHE ADVISED SHE WAS NOT INVOLVED AND SHE ONLY TOLD VICTIM ONE THAT SHE WAS RESPONSIBLE OUT OF IMPULSE. A SHORT TIME LATER WITH THE DEFENDANT IN MY REAR SEAT, I RESPONDED TO THE DEFENDANTâS RESIDENCE WHERE THE SUSPECT WAS CURRENTLY LOCATED. DEPUTY ANSTEAD RESPONDED WITH ME. UPON ARRIVAL, I OBSERVED THE SUSPECT TO BE SITTING IN A VEHICLE IN THE DRIVEWAY OF THE RESIDENCE. I MADE CONTACT WITH THE SUSPECT AN ATTEMPTED A NONCUSTODIAL INTERVIEW. THE SUSPECT DENIED ANY INVOLVEMENT AND WAS NOT FORTHCOMING WITH ANY INFORMATION. SHE CONTINUALLY ASKED WHERE THE DEFENDANT WAS AT AND WAS OBVIOUSLY INTOXICATED AND NOT VERY COOPERATIVE. A SECONDARY INTERVIEW WILL HAVE TO BE CONDUCTED AT A LATER TIME. DEPUTY ANSTEAD ARRESTED THE SUSPECT ON UNRELATED CHARGES (SEE CASE NUMBER 13-78435). AT THAT TIME, I TRANSPORTED THE DEFENDANT TO THE CITRUS COUNTY DETENTION FACILITY. UPON ARRIVAL SHE WAS TURNED OVER TO THE CITRUS COUNTY DETENTION FACILITY STAFF WHERE HER BOND WAS SET AT A TOTAL OF $5,500.00 PER THE BOND SCHEDULE. PHOTOGRAPHS AND LATENT PRINTS WERE LATER SUBMITTED TO EVIDENCE. |
